Public Involvement & Collaboration at USEPA…

Always evolving

C2D2 Conference Toronto, Canada, October 23, 2009 Patricia Bonner [bonner.patricia@epa.gov]

Topics AvailableOverview/Introduction 4-9Open Government 11-16Collaboration – defined 18-23Situation Assessment and other Tools for Successful Collaborations 25-45Collaboration Training @ EPA 47-51EPA’s Internet Tools 52

Overview/Introduction

TOP TEN Reasons for Public Involvement and Collaborative Processes

• 10: Increases compliance• 9: Perceived as a fairer process [Transparency]• 8: Reduces litigation and adversarial behavior• 7: Allows parties to “vent” and address

misunderstandings• 6: Fosters better relationships (Trust)• 5: More quality information and greater mutual learning• 4: Practicality check for EPA and others • 3: Greater public commitment to decisions/actions• 2: Technically superior options/more creative solutions• 1: Better environmental outcomes!

Short History• EPA established in 1970• Federal laws set minimum review & comment requirements for

public participation [APA – 1946; various media acts 1970s -80s]]

• Public Participation Policy [PPP] 1981 [expanded from minimum]

• Environmental Justice Executive Order 1994• Emergency Planning & Right to Know Act [Superfund

Amendments 1996• Began review of PPP - 1998• Public Involvement Policy [PIP] draft review 2002 [includes 2 –

week Internet based dialogue]• PIP issued May 2003• PI and Collaboration tools released 2003 – 2009• Collaboration White Paper and Listening sessions – 2004• Collaboration Training development, train-the-trainer and

workshops 2006 – 2009• Program-specific engagement activities 1972 - 2009

Policy’s Seven Basic Steps for Effective Public Involvement

• Plan and budget for public involvement activities

• Identify the interested and affected public• Consider providing technical/ financial

assistance to facilitate involvement • Provide information and outreach• Conduct public consultation and involvement

activities• Review and use input and provide feedback to

the public• Evaluate public involvement activities

EPA’s Model of Public Involvement and Collaboration Options

Less Interaction More Interaction

OUTREACH

Purpose: To provide information

Types:

WebsiteFact Sheet

Phone Hot LineFederal Register Notice

Press Release

INFORMATION EXCHANGE

Purpose: To provide & exchange data, opinions and options

Types:

Meetings with individualsPublic Meeting

WorkshopListening Session

Availability Session

RECOMMENDATIONS

Purpose: To obtain useful & influential advice or comments

Types:

Advisory CommitteeScoping SessionPolicy Dialogue

Task ForceJoint Fact-Finding

AGREEMENTS

Purpose: To reach workableagreement or settlement

Types:

Statement of PrinciplesNegotiated Rulemaking

Consensus PermitSettlement Agreement(consent decree/order)

STAKEHOLDERACTION

Purpose: To empower Stakeholders to take action

Types:

Industry Sector InitiativeVoluntary Program

Community Action for a Renewed Environment

Sustainability Forum

FormalCollaboration

Opportunity for a Collaborative Approach

Government Decision StakeholderDecision

PROMISE: We will keep you

informed PROMISE: We will listen,

acknowledge yourconcerns & aspirations, & provide

feedback on how your input Influenced our decision

PROMISE: We will take your advise or comments into account when making a

decision

PROMISE: We will work in good faith to reach an

understanding that we all can support & we will implement it as agreed

PROMISE: We will support your decision & assist in your implementation of it

OUTREACH

Purpose: Provide information

INFORMATION EXCHANGE

Purpose: Provide and exchange data, opinions and options

RECOMMENDATIONS

Purpose: Provide non-binding, but

influential advice or comments

AGREEMENTS

Purpose: Reach workable agreement

or settlement

STAKEHOLDER ACTION

Purpose: Empower stakeholders to

take action

Interaction among stakeholders

Collaborative behavior

Available information

Commitment to action

Participant satisfaction

Creative options

Increase in…

Public Involvement Spectrum:A Range of Possible Processes

Open Government Information

President’s Open Government Memorandum

“Government should be transparent. Transparency promotes accountability and provides information to citizens about what their government is doing.”

“Government should be participatory. Public engagement enhances the government's effectiveness and improves the quality of its decisions.”

“Government should be collaborative. Collaboration actively engages citizens in the

work of their government.”

President Barack Obama

January 21, 2009

Fishbowl Memo

• “In all its programs, EPA will provide for the fullest possible public participation in decision-making. This requires not only that EPA remain open and accessible to those representing all points of view, but also that EPA offices responsible for decisions take affirmative steps to solicit the views of those who will be affected by these decisions.”

• “I am committed to fulfilling President Obama’s direction to agency heads to make use of tools and technology to increase outreach and interaction with the public.”

• “I encourage our staff to be creative and innovative in the tools we use to engage the public in our decision-making.”

What may the Open Government Directive [OGD] call for?

• take specific actions implementing the principles of transparency, public participation and collaboration

• establish a system to enable the public to assess performance against the principles

• ensure that the public has the opportunity to identify information needs

• increase interagency collaboration

What may the OGD call for? [cont’d]

• increase the public’s opportunities to participate in government policy making and decisions

• develop agency-specific plans• seek ideas from the public on increasing

collaboration• enhance collaboration across all levels of

government, NGOs, the private sector• work together through an infrastructure

established to direct, track, measure and report action

Status

• A three-phased process of blogging, discussion and drafting/voting produced a very rough draft heavily emphasizing technology

• Comments will be considered and a directive or series of directives issued.

Latest release target date publicized

THIS week!

What new actions might EPA take to prepare for and implement the OGD?

Collaboration

“In the long history of humankind (and animal kind, too) those who learned to collaborate and improvise most effectively have prevailed.”

Charles Darwin

Collaboration is working together with one or more people to define and frame a shared problem, develop options, identify preferred solutions, and plan implementation of a sustainable solution.

Good collaborations require both attitude and approach

•Spirit of proactive cooperation•Work to understand others•Flexible and creative•Problem-solvers•Partners•Facilitators•Leaders

ATTITUDE

A formal collaboration uses a deliberate process for shared action throughout the full decision life-cycle:

• design• convene – bringing parties together• implement• evaluate

APPROACH

The Collaborative Premise

If you bring the right people together in constructive ways with good information, they will create authentic visions and strategies for addressing shared concerns.

From David D. Chrislip and Carl E. Larson, Collaborative Leadership, 1994, p 14

Collaboration’s Goal Powerful, Sustainable Decisions

Technical

Proc

edur

alInter-personal

Technical - substance of the actual decisionProcess - how the decision is made

Inter-personal - how people are treated

The more people are respectfully engaged, the more they understand, the greater the opportunities for agreement, the more sustainable the decision.

Situation Assessment

To Succeed in Collaboration

BEGIN

by doing a Situation Assessment

Then decide whether to launch a formal

collaboration

Conduct a Situation Assessment

What is it?

• An information gathering tool that:

– Identifies all affected internal and external stakeholders

– Identifies their issues

– Assesses the opportunities for public involvement

Why do it?• Helps determine the most appropriate

method for public involvement and/or collaboration for particular rule

• Help define goals for public involvement effort• Identify stakeholders and their concerns up front• Pinpoint data gaps or misunderstandings early

enough to address• Identify constraints on public involvement• Surface issues that need to be considered in rule

Conduct a Situation Assessment (cont’d)

Internal Assessment

• Barriers

• Assumptions

• Strengths

• Incentives

• Commitment

External Assessment

• Identify affected stakeholders

• What are their perceptions of the issues?

• What discussion or collaborative process options are possible?

Decide on aPublic Involvement Process

Outreach• One-way transfer of information from

EPA to the public as a whole

• Provides transparency about data, options, schedules and decisions

• Increases stakeholder knowledge of EPA programs and issues

• Reduces misinformation and misunderstanding

• Complies with legal notice requirements

• Major component of all other public involvement processes

• Can be implemented quickly

OUTREACH

Purpose:

Provide information

Methods:

Website Fact Sheet

Press ReleaseFederal Register Notice

OUTREACH

Purpose:

Provide information

Methods:

Website Fact Sheet

Press ReleaseFederal Register Notice

Information Exchange

– Two-way transfer of information

– Open invitation to all or focused on particular stakeholders

– Obtain input from a wide range of interested parties

– Stakeholders can educate each other in addition to EPA

– Compile a knowledge base of the public’s interests, ideas and needs

– Better understand and consider issues related to a particular decision

– Not intended to build consensus or agreement

INFORMATION EXCHANGE

Purpose:

Provide and exchange data, opinions and options

Methods:

Meetings with individuals Public meetings

WorkshopsListening sessions

Availability sessions

INFORMATION EXCHANGE

Purpose:

Provide and exchange data, opinions and options

Methods:

Meetings with individuals Public meetings

WorkshopsListening sessions

Availability sessions

Recommendations

– EPA interaction with stakeholder groups rather than general public

– Develop individual or group advice for EPA to consider when taking action

– Integrate technical or scientific information for improved decisions

– Reach understanding on data needs and/or policy options prior to EPA decision making

– Stimulate joint thinking to solve persistent problems

– Work through stakeholder concerns while reserving decision making authority

RECOMMENDATIONS

Purpose:

Provide non-binding but influential advice or comments

Methods:

Advisory committees Scoping sessionsPolicy dialogues

Task forceJoint fact finding

RECOMMENDATIONS

Purpose:

Provide non-binding but influential advice or comments

Methods:

Advisory committees Scoping sessionsPolicy dialogues

Task forceJoint fact finding

Agreements– EPA and each stakeholder group commit to

a decision on EPA action

– Involve stakeholders in developing creative solutions that they can “live with”

– Coordinate multiple agencies/levels of government in decision making to improve implementation

– Bring closure to decisions on proposals or issues where buy-in is needed from other parties

– Work out a mutually acceptable approach with parties who have the power to block or further implementation

– Achieve high degree of compliance by affected parties

AGREEMENTS

Purpose:

Reach workable agreement or settlement

Methods:

Negotiated rulemakingConsensus permit

Settlement agreementConsent Order

Statement of principles

AGREEMENTS

Purpose:

Reach workable agreement or settlement

Methods:

Negotiated rulemakingConsensus permit

Settlement agreementConsent Order

Statement of principles

Stakeholder Action– Regulation might not be the only or most

appropriate solution

– Involve stakeholders in developing creative solutions that they will implement

– EPA provides leadership, resources and energy in solving a problem that it alone cannot solve.

– Harness the energies of multiple parties to deal with different parts of the problem

– Achieve voluntary compliance by affected parties

STAKEHOLDER ACTION

Purpose:

Empower stakeholders to take action

Methods:

Industry Sector Initiatives Voluntary Programs

Watershed Collaboratives

STAKEHOLDER ACTION

Purpose:

Empower stakeholders to take action

Methods:

Industry Sector Initiatives Voluntary Programs

Watershed Collaboratives

COLLABORATION

Understand the Context for Collaboration

• Identify the nature of the problem • Understand what makes leadership

difficult• Identify the relevant

interests/stakeholders• Assess the state of stakeholder

agreement• Evaluate the community’s capacity for

change• Identify where problems/issues can be

most effectively addressed

From David D. Chrislip and Carl E. Larson, Collaborative Leadership, 1994, p 59

Identifying Stakeholders

• What are the necessary perspectives to credibly define the problems and create solutions and who can speak for those perspectives?

• What interests must be represented to reach implementable agreements and who can speak for them?

• Who are the people, groups or organizations with resources necessary to implement solutions or clout to block implementation?

• Who causes or is affected by the problem and who will the solution affect?

• Who could generate the political and institutional will to implement the solutions if they could agree to them?

From David D. Chrislip and Carl E. Larson, Collaborative Leadership, 1994, p 65

Group Capacity for Change Questions to Ponder…

• What is the level of trust, mistrust, conflict, polarization among stakeholders?

• Are there citizen leaders with sufficient capacity to start and sustain a process?

• Are there people in the community who can design and facilitate a collaborative process?

• Are there leaders with enough credibility/respect to convene stakeholders?

• Are there community information sources to help the collaborative make good decisions?

• If not, what others sources are available to support building a shared knowledge base?

Based on David D. Chrislip and Carl E. Larson, Collaborative Leadership, 1994, p. 6 and 69

Characteristics of Successful Collaborations

• Many levels of communication

• Commitment of organizations and leaders

• Commonly held, agreed-upon goals

• Clearly defined roles

• Authority determined to balance ownership by the organizations

Characteristics of Successful Collaborations (cont’d)

• Leadership dispersed; control shared and mutual

• Equal risk• Resources pooled and managed by

collaborative structure• Organizations share learning and products• More is accomplished jointly than could have

been individually

Paul Mattessich, et al ”Collaboration: What makes it work,” 2nd Edition, p. 81

Keys to Successful Collaborations

• Good timing and clear need• Strong stakeholder groups• Broad-based, inclusive involvement• Credible, open process to help build

trust• Commitment an/or involvement of

high-level, visible leaders• Support of “established” authorities or

power From David D. Chrislip and Carl E. Larson, Collaborative Leadership, 1994, pp 52-4

Keys to Successful Collaborations

• Overcome mistrust and skepticism early• Strong leadership of process, not strong

advocacy of a viewpoint• Good shared base of information/data• Shared responsibility, authority and

accountability for results• Interim successes• A shift from personal interests to broader

community concerns over time From David D. Chrislip and Carl E. Larson, Collaborative Leadership, 1994, pp 52-4

Personal Traits for Building Successful Collaborations and Partnerships

Ability to Listen

Excellent Communication Skills

Build and Maintain Relationships

Strong Technical Knowledge

Win/Win Attitude

Celebrate Success

Understand customer and partner needs Analyze what is heard Listen “for” not “against” Respect honest differences

Communicate effectively in speech and writing Use honesty, tact, and diplomacy Communicate regularly - don’t wait until decisions are final

Build partnership step by step Recognize that partnerships are about “we,” not “I” Be proactive Be creative and think outside the box Follow through on commitments Rely on actions to achieve trust and respect

Update skill sets often Encourage new skill sets and development opportunities for partners

Share power, vision, and responsibility Remember that partnerships are not a one-way street Achieve mutual benefits to all partners Spell out expectations and accountability

Recognize and congratulate each successful step towards goal 

“Conversation in the United States is a competitive exercise

in which the first person to draw breath is declared the

listener.”- Nathan Miller

Listening

Moving from Debate to Dialogue

Collaboration Training

Information

Now is a Great Time for Collaboration Training

It can help EPA:• Achieve the Obama Administration’s

goals of openness/transparency and collaborative governance

• Meet collaboration competency requirements

• Develop successful supervisors

• Enhance staff members’ collaboration skills

Now is a Great Time for Collaboration Training

It can help EPA:• Understand and appropriately use collaboration• Improve internal and interagency cooperation• Respond to greater public demand for inclusion • Build and sustain stakeholder relationships• Build internal collaboration and reduce

interoffice conflicts, misunderstandings and competition

• Build/leverage time and staff when funding is scarce

How Does This Training Work?

“Working Together” provides: • Keys to recognize how and where collaborative

processes are the best choice, when to use them with other options and when they are not appropriate

• Understanding of the levels/effectiveness of collaboration

• Ways to manage and steer collaborative efforts• Understanding of internal and external applications • Snapshot of personal collaboration skills, knowledge

and behaviors, both strengths and vulnerabilities • Collaborative behaviors to model

How Does This Training Work?

“Working Together” builds collaboration competencies:

• Entrepreneurship• Partnering• Interpersonal Skills• Conflict Management• External Awareness• Problem Solving• Influencing/Negotiating• Creativity/Innovation

Internet Tools for Public Engagement/ Collaboration

• Internet site http://www.epa.gov/publicinvolvement • Public Involvement Policy Guidelines

http://www.epa.gov/publicinvolvement/policy2003/guidance.pdf • Public Involvement Resources and Training (PIRT) database

http://www.epa.gov/publicinvolvement/pirtdatabase• Feedback Questionnaires

http://www.epa.gov/publicinvolvement/feedback • Evaluation Tool Box http://www.epa.gov/evaluate/toolbox/index.htm• Internet-based dialogues http://www.network-democracy.org/epa-pip/• How To Brochures http://www.epa.gov/publicinvolvement/brochures • Collaboration Tools and Services Fact Sheet

http://www.epa.gov/publicinvolvement/involvework.htm#othertools• Conflict Prevention and Resolution Center http://www.epa.gov/adr • Superfund Community Involvement Toolkit

http://www.epa.gov/superfund/tools/index.htm • Better Decisions Through Consultation and Collaboration

http://www.epe.gov/publicinvolvement/betterdecisions.pdf